Question 15743 — consumption

Summary

Mr. Éric Bothorel draws the attention of the Minister of the Economy, Finance and Industrial, Energy and Digital Sovereignty to the contractual and legal insecurity which threatens multi-user subscriptions to digital platforms. In a constrained economic context, these pricing plans allow low-income households to preserve their purchasing power by pooling the costs of their multi-access subscriptions. (video, music, press, software, etc.), in the logic of group purchases. However, this consumer organization is attacked by certain content platforms. These impose in their general conditions of sale (CGV) restrictive clauses based on vague criteria, for example limiting use only to the "home", to the "family" or to the "same address" and uncorrelated with realities (separated, reconstituted families, shared accommodation). The multiplication of these clauses and their varied wording, as well as the collection of personal information solely for the purposes of eligibility checks applied in a discretionary manner by digital platforms, leads to an imbalance to the detriment of the subscriber. While, at the same time, the formulas are calibrated with a number of places greater than the average size of a French family (2.15 people). Faced with this contractual ambiguity, we are witnessing increasing legalization on the part of the platforms, which are increasing the number of legal actions against co-subscription, via French platforms specialized on the subject. However, the courts often find themselves confined to a strict reading of these General Terms and Conditions, even when they are clearly unbalanced to the detriment of the subscriber. By way of illustration, the decision rendered in favor of Netflix, Disney and Apple against the co-subscription platform Spliiit testifies to this trend: the judges strictly applied the T&Cs of these platforms, despite the interpretable nature of the notions of “family” or “home” (judgment of the Paris judicial court, May 29, 2026, No. RG 22/07774). The protection of consumers facing these digital players requires the intervention of the legislator, he asks him what is the Government's analysis of this growing contractual insecurity and the risk of unfair clauses in multi-user digital subscriptions. He would like to know if the Government plans to refer the matter to the Commission on Unfair Terms and the DGCCRF in order to evaluate these practices, particularly when restrictions on use are based on imprecise notions, or when they give rise to disproportionate checks. of the personal situation of subscribers. Finally, he would like to know if the Government plans to modify the consumer code in order to protect the principle of free disposal of paid places in digital subscriptions, by prohibiting any clause restricting the ability of a user to freely designate the beneficiaries of the simultaneous access for which he has paid, in order to simplify and clarify uses.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

1. 9 June 2026

   Question

   Source: DateQuestion

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

• Éric Bothorel · auteur

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.